A field study on cost-effectiveness of five erosion control measures
Purpose - The purpose of this study is to quantitatively evaluate five erosion control measures at a residential development area in Louisiana, USA in order to provide Best Management Practices (BMPs) that have been tested in the field with demonstrated cost-effectiveness.Design methodology approach...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Management of environmental quality 2009-01, Vol.20 (1), p.6-20 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 20 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 6 |
| container_title | Management of environmental quality |
| container_volume | 20 |
| creator | Jin, Guang Englande, A.J |
| description | Purpose - The purpose of this study is to quantitatively evaluate five erosion control measures at a residential development area in Louisiana, USA in order to provide Best Management Practices (BMPs) that have been tested in the field with demonstrated cost-effectiveness.Design methodology approach - A total of six testing sites at a nine-degree slope were used in parallel to study five erosion control measures with one being the control site (no protection). Soil erosion rate was quantified using the erosion bridge method. Soil underlying the study area was analyzed for surface runoff potential. Precipitation was monitored using a Sigma rain gauge. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student Newman-Keuls Post-Hoc ANOVA analysis were conducted to evaluate statistical significance of erosion control effectiveness. Ratio of soil erosion rate reduction to cost of each control measure is also analyzed.Findings - All erosion control measures studied were very effective in reducing soil erosion for soils with high runoff potential, ranging from 75 percent to about 100 percent reduction in soil erosion rate. The most effective soil erosion protection was observed by Geojute fabric and Curlex blanket with greater than 90 percent reduction in soil erosion rate. However, after factoring-in cost, straw bedding was observed to be five times as cost-effective as Geojute fabric and Curlex blanket. The most cost-effective measure is temporary seeding using perennial rye grass. For each dollar spent, about 12 tons of soil per acre per year will be prevented from eroding.Originality value - The study evaluated erosion control measures in the field with quantitative cost-effectiveness analyzed. Besides enforcement, providing practical and cost-effectiveness control measures that have been tested in the field is critical for actual implementation of erosion control measures. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1108/14777830910922415 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_33192258</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1615587231</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c443t-252ebec2563236c0a8f034586996e07b1290719f7810d92d75e1083acb1f659a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqN0U1LAzEQBuAgCtbqD_C2ePDkaiYfm82x1E8oeNHzkmYnsGV3U5PdQv-90XqqSD1lIM87MDOEXAK9BaDlHQilVMmpBqoZEyCPyASULPMCQB-nOv3nCchTchbjilLGmFITcj_LXINtncVhrLeZ7zPr45Cjc2iHZoM9xph5l9AGMww-Nt-kH4Jvsw5NHAPGc3LiTBvx4uedkvfHh7f5c754fXqZzxa5FYIPOZMMl2iZLDjjhaWmdJQLWRZaF0jVEpimCrRTJdBas1pJTKNxY5fgCqkNn5LrXd918B8jxqHqmmixbU2PfowV55CGl-VByCjXtFDiIARBQYqCJ3i1B1d-DH2aNjUTksm08oRgh2xaVAzoqnVoOhO2FdDq60zVrzOlDN1lsMNg2vpfkZs_Ivu0WteOfwJ-Cp3E</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>204525415</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A field study on cost-effectiveness of five erosion control measures</title><source>Emerald Journals</source><source>Standard: Emerald eJournal Premier Collection</source><creator>Jin, Guang ; Englande, A.J</creator><creatorcontrib>Jin, Guang ; Englande, A.J</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose - The purpose of this study is to quantitatively evaluate five erosion control measures at a residential development area in Louisiana, USA in order to provide Best Management Practices (BMPs) that have been tested in the field with demonstrated cost-effectiveness.Design methodology approach - A total of six testing sites at a nine-degree slope were used in parallel to study five erosion control measures with one being the control site (no protection). Soil erosion rate was quantified using the erosion bridge method. Soil underlying the study area was analyzed for surface runoff potential. Precipitation was monitored using a Sigma rain gauge. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student Newman-Keuls Post-Hoc ANOVA analysis were conducted to evaluate statistical significance of erosion control effectiveness. Ratio of soil erosion rate reduction to cost of each control measure is also analyzed.Findings - All erosion control measures studied were very effective in reducing soil erosion for soils with high runoff potential, ranging from 75 percent to about 100 percent reduction in soil erosion rate. The most effective soil erosion protection was observed by Geojute fabric and Curlex blanket with greater than 90 percent reduction in soil erosion rate. However, after factoring-in cost, straw bedding was observed to be five times as cost-effective as Geojute fabric and Curlex blanket. The most cost-effective measure is temporary seeding using perennial rye grass. For each dollar spent, about 12 tons of soil per acre per year will be prevented from eroding.Originality value - The study evaluated erosion control measures in the field with quantitative cost-effectiveness analyzed. Besides enforcement, providing practical and cost-effectiveness control measures that have been tested in the field is critical for actual implementation of erosion control measures.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1477-7835</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1758-6119</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1108/14777830910922415</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EMHEEB</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing Limited</publisher><subject>Best management practices ; Biodegradable materials ; Biodegradation ; Construction ; Cost analysis ; Creeks & streams ; Environmental quality ; Erosion control ; Erosion rates ; Fabrics ; Housing developments ; Lakes ; Pollution ; Rain gauges ; Runoff ; Sediments ; Soil erosion ; Soil erosion control ; Studies ; Surface runoff ; Variance analysis ; Vegetation ; Water pollution ; Water quality ; Water treatment</subject><ispartof>Management of environmental quality, 2009-01, Vol.20 (1), p.6-20</ispartof><rights>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</rights><rights>Copyright Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c443t-252ebec2563236c0a8f034586996e07b1290719f7810d92d75e1083acb1f659a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c443t-252ebec2563236c0a8f034586996e07b1290719f7810d92d75e1083acb1f659a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/14777830910922415/full/pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gemerald$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/14777830910922415/full/html$$EHTML$$P50$$Gemerald$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,967,11635,21695,27924,27925,52686,52689,53244,53372</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jin, Guang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Englande, A.J</creatorcontrib><title>A field study on cost-effectiveness of five erosion control measures</title><title>Management of environmental quality</title><description>Purpose - The purpose of this study is to quantitatively evaluate five erosion control measures at a residential development area in Louisiana, USA in order to provide Best Management Practices (BMPs) that have been tested in the field with demonstrated cost-effectiveness.Design methodology approach - A total of six testing sites at a nine-degree slope were used in parallel to study five erosion control measures with one being the control site (no protection). Soil erosion rate was quantified using the erosion bridge method. Soil underlying the study area was analyzed for surface runoff potential. Precipitation was monitored using a Sigma rain gauge. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student Newman-Keuls Post-Hoc ANOVA analysis were conducted to evaluate statistical significance of erosion control effectiveness. Ratio of soil erosion rate reduction to cost of each control measure is also analyzed.Findings - All erosion control measures studied were very effective in reducing soil erosion for soils with high runoff potential, ranging from 75 percent to about 100 percent reduction in soil erosion rate. The most effective soil erosion protection was observed by Geojute fabric and Curlex blanket with greater than 90 percent reduction in soil erosion rate. However, after factoring-in cost, straw bedding was observed to be five times as cost-effective as Geojute fabric and Curlex blanket. The most cost-effective measure is temporary seeding using perennial rye grass. For each dollar spent, about 12 tons of soil per acre per year will be prevented from eroding.Originality value - The study evaluated erosion control measures in the field with quantitative cost-effectiveness analyzed. Besides enforcement, providing practical and cost-effectiveness control measures that have been tested in the field is critical for actual implementation of erosion control measures.</description><subject>Best management practices</subject><subject>Biodegradable materials</subject><subject>Biodegradation</subject><subject>Construction</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>Creeks & streams</subject><subject>Environmental quality</subject><subject>Erosion control</subject><subject>Erosion rates</subject><subject>Fabrics</subject><subject>Housing developments</subject><subject>Lakes</subject><subject>Pollution</subject><subject>Rain gauges</subject><subject>Runoff</subject><subject>Sediments</subject><subject>Soil erosion</subject><subject>Soil erosion control</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Surface runoff</subject><subject>Variance analysis</subject><subject>Vegetation</subject><subject>Water pollution</subject><subject>Water quality</subject><subject>Water treatment</subject><issn>1477-7835</issn><issn>1758-6119</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqN0U1LAzEQBuAgCtbqD_C2ePDkaiYfm82x1E8oeNHzkmYnsGV3U5PdQv-90XqqSD1lIM87MDOEXAK9BaDlHQilVMmpBqoZEyCPyASULPMCQB-nOv3nCchTchbjilLGmFITcj_LXINtncVhrLeZ7zPr45Cjc2iHZoM9xph5l9AGMww-Nt-kH4Jvsw5NHAPGc3LiTBvx4uedkvfHh7f5c754fXqZzxa5FYIPOZMMl2iZLDjjhaWmdJQLWRZaF0jVEpimCrRTJdBas1pJTKNxY5fgCqkNn5LrXd918B8jxqHqmmixbU2PfowV55CGl-VByCjXtFDiIARBQYqCJ3i1B1d-DH2aNjUTksm08oRgh2xaVAzoqnVoOhO2FdDq60zVrzOlDN1lsMNg2vpfkZs_Ivu0WteOfwJ-Cp3E</recordid><startdate>20090101</startdate><enddate>20090101</enddate><creator>Jin, Guang</creator><creator>Englande, A.J</creator><general>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090101</creationdate><title>A field study on cost-effectiveness of five erosion control measures</title><author>Jin, Guang ; Englande, A.J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c443t-252ebec2563236c0a8f034586996e07b1290719f7810d92d75e1083acb1f659a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Best management practices</topic><topic>Biodegradable materials</topic><topic>Biodegradation</topic><topic>Construction</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>Creeks & streams</topic><topic>Environmental quality</topic><topic>Erosion control</topic><topic>Erosion rates</topic><topic>Fabrics</topic><topic>Housing developments</topic><topic>Lakes</topic><topic>Pollution</topic><topic>Rain gauges</topic><topic>Runoff</topic><topic>Sediments</topic><topic>Soil erosion</topic><topic>Soil erosion control</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Surface runoff</topic><topic>Variance analysis</topic><topic>Vegetation</topic><topic>Water pollution</topic><topic>Water quality</topic><topic>Water treatment</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jin, Guang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Englande, A.J</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Management of environmental quality</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jin, Guang</au><au>Englande, A.J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A field study on cost-effectiveness of five erosion control measures</atitle><jtitle>Management of environmental quality</jtitle><date>2009-01-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>6</spage><epage>20</epage><pages>6-20</pages><issn>1477-7835</issn><eissn>1758-6119</eissn><coden>EMHEEB</coden><abstract>Purpose - The purpose of this study is to quantitatively evaluate five erosion control measures at a residential development area in Louisiana, USA in order to provide Best Management Practices (BMPs) that have been tested in the field with demonstrated cost-effectiveness.Design methodology approach - A total of six testing sites at a nine-degree slope were used in parallel to study five erosion control measures with one being the control site (no protection). Soil erosion rate was quantified using the erosion bridge method. Soil underlying the study area was analyzed for surface runoff potential. Precipitation was monitored using a Sigma rain gauge. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student Newman-Keuls Post-Hoc ANOVA analysis were conducted to evaluate statistical significance of erosion control effectiveness. Ratio of soil erosion rate reduction to cost of each control measure is also analyzed.Findings - All erosion control measures studied were very effective in reducing soil erosion for soils with high runoff potential, ranging from 75 percent to about 100 percent reduction in soil erosion rate. The most effective soil erosion protection was observed by Geojute fabric and Curlex blanket with greater than 90 percent reduction in soil erosion rate. However, after factoring-in cost, straw bedding was observed to be five times as cost-effective as Geojute fabric and Curlex blanket. The most cost-effective measure is temporary seeding using perennial rye grass. For each dollar spent, about 12 tons of soil per acre per year will be prevented from eroding.Originality value - The study evaluated erosion control measures in the field with quantitative cost-effectiveness analyzed. Besides enforcement, providing practical and cost-effectiveness control measures that have been tested in the field is critical for actual implementation of erosion control measures.</abstract><cop>Bradford</cop><pub>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</pub><doi>10.1108/14777830910922415</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1477-7835 |
| ispartof | Management of environmental quality, 2009-01, Vol.20 (1), p.6-20 |
| issn | 1477-7835 1758-6119 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_33192258 |
| source | Emerald Journals; Standard: Emerald eJournal Premier Collection |
| subjects | Best management practices Biodegradable materials Biodegradation Construction Cost analysis Creeks & streams Environmental quality Erosion control Erosion rates Fabrics Housing developments Lakes Pollution Rain gauges Runoff Sediments Soil erosion Soil erosion control Studies Surface runoff Variance analysis Vegetation Water pollution Water quality Water treatment |
| title | A field study on cost-effectiveness of five erosion control measures |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T20%3A31%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20field%20study%20on%20cost-effectiveness%20of%20five%20erosion%20control%20measures&rft.jtitle=Management%20of%20environmental%20quality&rft.au=Jin,%20Guang&rft.date=2009-01-01&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=6&rft.epage=20&rft.pages=6-20&rft.issn=1477-7835&rft.eissn=1758-6119&rft.coden=EMHEEB&rft_id=info:doi/10.1108/14777830910922415&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1615587231%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=204525415&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |